15 
pollen) is taken, though quite available for another flower ! The 
innumerable contrivances to secure intercrossing are infinitely 
more varied and marvellous than was ever contemplated by Lin- 
nseus, Paley, oy the late Master of Trinity College, Cambridge. 
Another instance of false reasoning, which I have heard 
brought before this Society, is the following : — “ Mountain 
grasses are viviparous (that is, produce a kind of bulb instead 
of flowers and seeds) in order that the winds, so prevalent at 
high altitudes, may not waft the seeds into the valleys below ” ! 
One other instance, and which will be found in the Bridgewater 
Treatise of Dr. Roget (On Animal and Vegetable Physiology, 
vol. i. p. 95, 8vo. ed.), who says : “ The different kinds of 
hairs, of down, of thorns and prickles, which are found on the 
surface of different plants, have various uses, some of which 
are easily understood (?), particularly that of defending the 
plant from molestation by animals. The sting of the nettle is 
of this class.” Dr. Roget does not seem to have been aware of 
the fact that the caterpillars of several kinds of insects feed upon 
nettle-leaves ! With regard to mountain grasses being vivi- 
parous, it is an unfair statement, which might lead one to suppose 
that all mountain grasses are so. They are rather the exception 
than otherwise. Again it might be asked, how is it that the 
creeping willows, to the seeds of which silky hairs are attached, 
for the express purpose of wafting them away, flourish and 
carpet the mountain-tops of the Alps ? 
These few instances will be sufficient to show how cautious 
we must be in assigning a use to certain organs and organisms 
which experience may subsequently prove was never intended ! 
It is by such hasty generalizations that teleologists only bring 
down contempt upon themselves, which natural theology is 
compelled to share. 
Another application of the word “ use ” must now be con- 
sidered. The healthy and vigorous action of any organ depends 
upon its exercise ; and an increase of growth is the result of 
use, while a decrease or atrophied condition is the consequence 
of disuse. Thus when we see a bird fly, we are justified in say- 
ing that the use of its wings is for flight ; but when we look' 
at the rudimentary condition of the wings of an ostrich or 
apteryx, and supposing we know of no other birds, such a con- 
clusion could never be drawn. Seeing, however, that the 
absence of the power of flying is exceptional, we have reason to 
believe, in accordance with the above law, that the power has 
gone in consequence of disuse. So the wing is now useless. 
But such uselessness is not always the case of atrophy. Take 
the penguin. Here, too, the wing is useless for flying, but 
observation tells us that it does admirably well for swimming. It 
